arizona v. california, 439 u.s. 419 (1979)

Upload: scribd-government-docs

Post on 06-Jul-2018

215 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

  • 8/17/2019 Arizona v. California, 439 U.S. 419 (1979)

    1/25

    439 U.S. 419

    99 S.Ct. 995

    58 L.Ed.2d 627

    State of ARIZONA, Plaintiff,

    v.State of CALIFORNIA et al.

     No. 8, Orig.

    Supreme Court of the United States

     January 9, 1979.

    (3) Article IX of said Decree is not affected by this

    1 PER CURIAM and SUPPLEMENTAL DECREE.

    2 The United States of America, Intervenor, State of Arizona, Complainant, the

    California Defendants (State of California, Palo Verde Irrigation District,

    Imperial Irrigation District, Coachella Valley County Water District, The

    Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, City of Los Angeles, City

    of San Diego, County of San Diego), and State of Nevada, Intervenor, pursuantto Art. VI of the Decree entered in the case on March 9, 1964, at 376 U.S. 340,

    84 S.Ct. 755, 11 L.Ed.2d 757, and amended on February 28, 1966, at 383 U.S.

    268, 86 S.Ct. 924, 15 L.Ed.2d 743, have agreed to the present perfected rights

    to the use of mainstream water in each State and their priority dates as set forth

    herein. Therefore, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED

    that the joint motion of the United States, the State of Arizona, the California

    Defendants, and the State of Nevada to enter a supplement decree is granted

    and that said present perfected rights in each State and their priority dates are

    determined to be as set forth below, subject to the following:

    3 (1) The following listed present perfected rights relate to the quantity of water 

    which may be used by each claimant and the list is not intended to limit or 

    redefine the type of use otherwise set forth in said Decree.

    4 (2) This determination shall in no way affect future adjustments resulting from

    determinations relating to settlement of Indian reservation boundaries referredto in Art. II(D)(5) of said Decree.

    5

  • 8/17/2019 Arizona v. California, 439 U.S. 419 (1979)

    2/25

    list of present perfected rights.

    Unit Diversion

    Quantity Acre-Feet

    Cocopah 6.37

    Colorado River 6.67

    Chemehuevi 5.97

    Ft. Mojave 6.46

    Ft. Yuma 6.67

    6

    7 (4) Any water right listed herein may be exercised only for beneficial uses.

    8 (5) In the event of a determination of insufficient mainstream water to satisfy

     present perfected rights pursuant to Art. II(B)(3) of said Decree, the Secretary

    of the Interior shall, before providing for the satisfaction of any of the other 

     present perfected rights except for those listed herein as "MISCELLANEOUS

    PRESENT PERFECTED RIGHTS" (rights numbered 7-21 and 29-80 below) in

    the order of their priority dates without regard to State lines, first provide for 

    the satisfaction in full of all rights of the Chemehuevi Indian Reservation,

    Cocopah Indian Reservation, Fort Yuma Indian Reservation, Colorado River 

    Indian Reservation, and the Fort Mojave Indian Reservation as set forth in Art.

    II(D)(1)-(5) of said Decree, provided that the quantities fixed in paragraphs (1)

    through (5) of Art. II(D) of said Decree shall continue to be subject to

    appropriate adjustment by agreement or decree of this Court in the event that

    the boundaries of the respective reservations are finally determined. Additional

     present perfected rights so adjudicated by such adjustment shall be in annual

    quantities not to exceed the quantities of mainstream water necessary to supply

    the consumptive use required for irrigation of the practicably irrigable acres

    which are included within any area determined to be within a reservation by

    such final determination of a boundary and for the satisfaction of related uses.

    The quantities of diversions are to be computed by determining net practicablyirrigable acres within each additional area using the methods set forth by the

    Special Master in this case in his Report to this Court dated December 5, 1960,

    and by applying the unit diversion quantities thereto, as listed below:

    9 Indian Reservation Per Irrigable Acre

  • 8/17/2019 Arizona v. California, 439 U.S. 419 (1979)

    3/25

    Table

    * ARIZONA

    Defined Area of Land (acre-feet)5 Acres5 Date

    1) Cocopah Indian Reservation 2744 431 Sept. 27, 1917

    2) Colorado River Indian 358,400 53,768 Mar. 3, 1865

    10 The foregoing reference to a quantity of water necessary to supply consumptive

    use required for irrigation, and as that provision is included within paragraphs

    (1) through (5) of Art. II(D) of said Decree, shall constitute the means of 

    determining quantity of adjudicated water rights but shall not constitute a

    restriction of the usage of them to irrigation or other agricultural application. If 

    all or part of the adjudicated water rights of any of the five Indian Reservations

    is used other than for irrigation or other agricultural application, the total

    consumptive use, as that term is defined in Art. I(A) of said Decree, for said

    Reservation shall not exceed the consumptive use that would have resulted if 

    the diversions listed in subparagraph (i) of paragraphs (1) through (5) of Art.

    II(D) of said Decree and the equivalent portions of any supplement thereto had

     been used for irrigation of the number of acres specified for that Reservation in

    said paragraphs and supplement and for the satisfaction of related uses. Effect

    shall be given to this paragraph notwithstanding the priority dates of the present

     perfected rights as listed below. However, nothing in this paragraph (5) shallaffect the order in which such rights listed below as "MISCELLANEOUS

    PRESENT PERFECTED RIGHTS" (numbered 7-21 and 29-80 below) shall be

    satisfied. Furthermore, nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to determine

    the order of satisfying any other Indian water rights claims not herein specified.

    11

    12 A. Federal Establishments' Present Perfected Rights

    13 The Federal establishments named in Art. II, subdivision (D), paragraphs (2),

    (4), and (5) of the Decree entered March 9, 1964, in this case, such rights

    having been decreed in Art. II:

    Annual

    Diversions Net Priority

    14

    15

    16

    Reservation

  • 8/17/2019 Arizona v. California, 439 U.S. 419 (1979)

    4/25

    3) Fort Mojave Indian Reservation 68,447 10,589 Feb. 2, 1911

    Annual

    Diversions Priority

    ----------------- -----------

    17 252,016 37308 Nov. 22, 1873

    18 51,986 7,79 Nov. 16, 1874

    19

    B. Water Projects' Present Perfected Rights

    20 (4) The Valley Division, Yuma Project  in annual quantities not to exceed (i)

    254,200 acre-feet of diversions from the mainstream or (ii) the quantity of 

    mainstream water necessary to supply the consumptive use required for 

    irrigation of 43,562 acres and for the satisfaction of related uses, whichever of 

    (i) or (ii) is less, with a priority date of 1901.

    21 (5) The Yuma Auxiliary Project, Unit B in annual quantities not to exceed (i)

    6,800 acre-feet of diversions from the mainstream or (ii) the quantity of 

    mainstream water necessary to supply the consumptive use required for 

    irrigation of 1,225 acres and for the satisfaction of related uses, whichever of (i)

    or (ii) is less, with a priority date of July 8, 1905.

    22 (6) The North Gila Valley Unit, Yuma Mesa Division, Gila Project  in annual

    quantities not to exceed (i) 24,500 acre-feet of diversions from the mainstreamor (ii) the quantity of mainstream water necessary to supply the consumptive

    use required for irrigation of 4,030 acres and for the satisfaction of related uses,

    whichever of (i) or (ii) is less, with a priority date of July 8, 1905.

    C. Miscellaneous Present Perfected Rights

    23 1. The following miscellaneous present perfected rights in Arizona in annual

    quantities of water not to exceed the listed acre-feet of diversion from the

    mainstream to supply the consumptive use required for irrigation and the

    satisfaction of related uses within the boundaries of the land described and with

    the priority dates listed:

    24 Defined Area of Land (acre-feet) Date

    25

  • 8/17/2019 Arizona v. California, 439 U.S. 419 (1979)

    5/25

    7)

    8)

    Annual

    Diversions Priority

    ---------------- -----------

    9)

    10)

    26

    27 160 acres in Lots 21, 24, 25, Sec. 29 and 960 1915

    28 Lots 15, 16, 17 and 18, and the SW1/4 of the

    29 SE1/4, Sec. 30, T.16S., R22E., San Bernardino

    30 Base and Meridian, Yuma County, Arizona.(Powers)2

    31

    32 Lots 11, 12, 13 19, 20, 22, and S1/2 of SW1/4, 1,140 1915

    Sec. 30, T.16S., R22E., San Berardino Base

    33 and Meridian, Yuma County, Arizona. (United States)3

    34  NOTE: Footnotes to table items 7 through 25 are on p. 428

    35 Defined Area of Land (acre-feet) Date

    36

    37

    38 60 acres within Lot2, Sec. 15 and Lots 1 and 2, 360 1902

    Sec. 22 T.10N., R.19W, G&SRBM. (Graham)2

    39 180 acres within the N1/2 of the S1/2 and the

    40 S1/2 of the N1/2 of Sec. 13 and the SW1/4 of the 1,080 1902

  • 8/17/2019 Arizona v. California, 439 U.S. 419 (1979)

    6/25

    11)

    12) 40 acres within Sec. 13, T.17N., R.22W., G & SRBM. 240 1902

    13) 120 acres within Sec. 27, T.18N., R.21W., G & SRBM.

    14) 180 acres within the NW1/4 of the NE1/4, the 1,080 1902

    41  NE1/4 of Sec. 14, T.18., R.22W., G&SRBM.(Hulet)2

    42 45 acres within the NE1/4 of the SW1/14, the

    SW1/4 of theSW1/4 and the SE1/4 of the

    43 SW1/4 of sec. 11, T.18N., R.22W., G&SRBM.

    44 80 acres within the n1/2 of the SE1/4 of Sec. 1,050 1902

    45 11.T.18N.,r22W.,G&SRBM.

    10 acres within the NW1/4 of the NE1/4 of 

    46 Sec. 15, T.18N., R.22W., G & SRBM.

    47 40 acres within the SE1/4 of the SE1/4 of Sec. 15,

    T.18N., R.22W., G & SRBM. (Hurschler)2

    48

    49 (Miller)2

    50

    51 15 acres within the NW1/4 of the NW1/4, Sec. 23, 810 1902

    52 T.18N., R.22W., G & SRBM. (McKellips and Granite Reef 

    Farms)4

    53

    54 SW1/4 of the NE1/4, the NE1/4 of the SW1/4, the

     

  • 8/17/2019 Arizona v. California, 439 U.S. 419 (1979)

    7/25

    Annual

    Diversions Priority

    --------------- -----------

    15) 53.89 acres as follows: 318 1928

    55  , ,

    56 the SW1/4 of the SE1/4, and the

    57 SE1/4 of the SE1/4, Sec. 31, T.18N., R.21W., G & SRBM.

    58 (Sherrill & Lafollette)4

    59 Defined Area of Land (acre-feet) Date

    60

    61

    62 Beginning at a point 995.1 feet easterly of the

    63  NW corner of the NE1/4 of Sec. 10, T.8S.,

    64 R.22W., Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian;

    65 on the northerly boundary of the said NE1/4,

    66 which is the true point of beginning, then

    67 in a southerly direction to a point on the

    68 southerly boundary of the said NE1/4 which is

    991.2 feet E. of the SW corner of said NE1/4

    69 thence easterly along the S. line of the NE1/4,

    70 a distance of 807.3 feet to a point, thence N.

    71 0x7' W., 768.8 feet to a point, thence E.

  • 8/17/2019 Arizona v. California, 439 U.S. 419 (1979)

    8/25

    16) 60 acres within the NW1/4 of the NW1/4

    124.0 feet to a point, thence northerly 0x

    72 14' W., 1,067.6 feet to a point, thence E.

    73 130 feet to a point, thence northerly 0x20'

    74 W., 405.2 feet to a point, thence northerly 63x

    75 10' W., 506.0 feet to a point, thence northerly

    90x 15' W., 562.9 feet to a point on the

    76 northerly boundary of the said NE1/4, thence

    77 easterly along the said northerly boundary of 

    78 the said NE1/4, 116.6 feet to the true point of 

    79 the beginning containing 53.89 acres. All as

    80 more particularly described and set forth in

    81 that survey executed by Thomas A. Yowell,

    Land Surveyor on June 24, 1969. (Molina)4

    82

    83 and the north half of the SW1/4 of the NW1/4 of 

    84 Sec. 14, T.8S., R.22W., G & SRBM.

    85 70 acres within the S1/2 of the SW1/4 of the SW1/4 780 1925

    86 and the W1/2 of the SW1/4, Sec. 14, T.8S., R.22W.,

    G & SRBM. (Sturges)4

  • 8/17/2019 Arizona v. California, 439 U.S. 419 (1979)

    9/25

    17)120 acres within the N1/2 NE1/4, NE1/4 NW1/4,

    Annual

    Diversions Priority

    --------------- -------------

    18)

    19)

    87

    88 Section 23, T.18N., R.22W., G & SRBM. (Zozaya)4 720 1912

    89 Defined Area of Land (acre-feet) Date

    90

    91 40 acres in the W1/2 of the NE1/4 of Section 30,

    92 and 60 acres in the W1/2 of the SE1/4 of Section

    93 30, and 60 acres in the E1/2 of the NW1/4 of 

    94 Section 31, comprising a total of 160 acres all in

    95 Township 18 North, Range 21 West of the G & SRBM. (Swan)4 960 1902

    96 7 acres in the East 300 feet of the W1/2 of Lot 1

    97 (Lot 1, being the SE1/4 SE1/4, 40 acres more or less),

    98 Section 28, Township 16 South, Range 22 East,

    99 San Bernardino Meridian, lying North of U.S. Bureau

    100 of Reclamation levee right of way. EXCEPT that

    101  portion conveyed to the United States of America

    102  by instrument recorded in Docket 417, page 150

  • 8/17/2019 Arizona v. California, 439 U.S. 419 (1979)

    10/25

    Annual

    Annual Consumptive

    Diversions Use Priority

    Defined Area of Land (acre-feet) (acre-feet) Date

    20) City of Parker 2 630 400 1905

    21) City of Yuma2 2,333 1,478 1893

    II

    CALIFORNIA

    EXCEPTING any portion of the East 300 feet of 

    W1/2 of Lot 1 within the natural bed of the

    103 Colorado River below the line of ordinary high

    104 water and also EXCEPTING any artificial accretions

    105 waterward of said line of ordinary high water,

    106 all of which comprises approximately seven (7) acres.

    107 (Milton and Jean Phillips)4 42 1900

    108 2. The following miscellaneous present perfected rights in Arizona in annual

    quantities of water not to exceed the listed number of acre-feet of (i) diversions

    from the mainstream or (ii) the quantity of mainstream water necessary to

    supply the consumptive use, whichever of (i) or (ii) is less, for domestic,

    municipal, and industrial purposes within the boundaries of the land described

    and with the priority dates listed:

    109

    110

    111 A. Federal Establishments' Present Perfected Rights

    112 The federal establishments named in Art. II, subdivision (D), paragraphs (1),

    (3), (4), and (5) of the Decree entered March 9, 1964, in this case such rights

  • 8/17/2019 Arizona v. California, 439 U.S. 419 (1979)

    11/25

    Defined Area of Land (acre-feet)5 Acres5 Date

    22)

    Chemehuevi Indian Reservation 11,340 1,900 Feb. 2, 1907

    23)

    Yuma Indian Reservation 51,616 7,743 Jan. 9,1884

    24)

    Colorado River Indian Reservation 10,745 1,612 Nov. 22, 1873

    40,241 6,037 Nov. 16, 1874

    3,760 564 May 15, 1876

    25)

    Fort Mojave Indian Reservation 13,698 2,119 Sept. 18, 1890

    having been decreed by Art. II:

    Annual

    Diversions Net Priority

    113

    114

    115

    116

    117

    118 B. Water Districts' and Projects' Present Perfected Rights

    26)

    119 The Palo Verde Irrigation District  in annual quantities not to exceed (i) 219,780

    acre-feet of diversions from the mainstream or (ii) the quantity of mainstream

    water necessary to supply the consumptive use required for irrigation of 33,604

    acres and for the satisfaction of related uses, whichever of (i) or (ii) is less, with

    a priority date of 1877.

    27)

    120 The Imperial Irrigation District  in annual quantities not to exceed (i) 2,600,000

    acre-feet of diversions from the mainstream or (ii) the quantity of mainstream

  • 8/17/2019 Arizona v. California, 439 U.S. 419 (1979)

    12/25

    Defined Area of Land (acre feet) Date

    29)

    6780 1856

    water necessary to supply the consumptive use required for irrigation of 

    424,145 acres and for the satisfaction of related uses, whichever of (i) or (ii) is

    less, with a priority date of 1901.

    28)

    121 The Reservation Division, Yuma Project, California (non-Indian portion) in

    annual quantities not to exceed (i) 38,270 acre-feet of diversions from the

    mainstream or (ii) the quantity of mainstream water necessary to supply the

    consumptive use required for irrigation of 6,294 acres and for the satisfaction

    of related uses, whichever of (i) or (ii) is less, with a priority date of July 8,

    1905.

    C. Miscellaneous Present Perfected Rights

    122 1. The following miscellaneous present perfected rights in California in annual

    quantities of water not to exceed the listed number of acre-feet of diversions

    from the mainstream to supply the consumptive use required for irrigation and

    the satisfaction of related uses within the boundaries of the land described and

    with the priority dates listed:

    Annual

    123 Diversions Priority

    124

    125 130 acres within Lots 1, 2, and 3,

    126 SE1/4 of NE1/4 of Section 27, T.16S.,

    R.22E., S.B.B. & M (Wavers)

     NOTE:Footnotes to table items 29 through are on p. 435 Annual

  • 8/17/2019 Arizona v. California, 439 U.S. 419 (1979)

    13/25

    Defined Area of Land (acre feet) Date

    30)

    31)

    32)

    33)

    34)

    Diversions Priority

    40 acres within W1/2, W1/2 of E1/2 of Section 1,

    T.9N., R.22E., S.B.B. & M. (Stephenson) 240 19236

    20 acres within Lots 1 and 2, Sec. 19, T.13S.,

    R.23E., and Lots 2, 3, and 4 of Sec. 24, T.13S.,

    R.22E., S.B.B. & M. (Mendivil)6 120 1893

    30 acres within NW1/4 of SE1/4, S1/2 of SE1/4,

    Sec. 24, and NW1/4 of NE1/4, Sec. 25, all in

    T.9S., R.21E., S.B.B. & M. (Grannis)6 180 1928

    25 acres within Lot 6, Sec. 5; and Lots 1 and 2,

    SW1/4 of NE 1/4, and NE1/4 of SE1/4 of Sec. 8,

    and Lots 1 & 2 of Sec. 9, all in T.13S., R.22E.,

    S.B.B. & M. (Morgan)6 150 1913

    18 acres within E1/2 of NW1/4 and W1/2 of 

  • 8/17/2019 Arizona v. California, 439 U.S. 419 (1979)

    14/25

    35)

    36)

    37)

    38)

    39)

     NE1/4 of Sec. 14, T.10S., R.21E., S.B.B. & M.

    (Milpitas)6 108 1918

    10 acres within N1/2 of NE1/4, SE1/4 of NE1/4,

    and NE1/4 of SE1/4 Sec. 30, T. 9 N., R. 23 E.,

    S.B.B. & M. (Simons)6 60 1889

    16 acres within E1/2 of NW1/4 and N1/2

    of SW1/4, Sec. 12, T.9N., R.22E.,

    S.B.B. & M. (Colo.R. Sportsmen's League)6 96 1921

    11 5 acres within E1/2 of NW1/4, Sec. 1,

    T.10S., R.21E., S.B.B. & M. (Milpitas)6 69 1914

    11 acres within S1/2 of SW1/4, Sec. 12,

    T.9N., R.22E., S.B.B. & M. (Andrade)6 66 1921

    6 acres within Lots 2, 3, and 7 and NE1/4

    of SW1/4, Sec. 19, T.9N., R.23E.,

    S.B.B. & M. (Reynolds)6 36 1904 Annual

  • 8/17/2019 Arizona v. California, 439 U.S. 419 (1979)

    15/25

    Defined Area of Land (acre feet) Date

    40)

    41)

    42)

    Annual

    Annual Consumptive

    Diversions Use Priority

    Defined Area of Land (acre-feet) (acre-feet) Date

    Diversions Priority

    10 acres within N1/2 of NE1/4, SE1/4 of 

     NE1/4 and NE1/4 of SE1/4 Sec. 24, T.9N.,

    R.22E., S.B.B. & M. (Cooper)6 60 1905

    20 acres within SW1/4 of SW1/4 (Lot 8),

    Sec. 19, T.9N., R.23E., S.B.B. & M. (Chagnon)7 120 1925

    20 acres within NE1/4 of SW1/4, N1/2 of 

    SE1/4, SE1/4 of SE1/4, Sec. 14, T.9S.,

    R.21E., S.B.B. & M. (Lawrence)7 120 1915

    2 The following miscellaneous present perfected rights in California in annual

    quantities of water not to exceed the listed number of acre-feet of (i) diversions

    from the mainstream or (ii) the quantity of mainstream water necessary tosupply the consumptive use, whichever of (i) or (ii) is less, for domestic,

    municipal, and industrial purposes within the boundaries of the land described

    and with the priority dates listed:

  • 8/17/2019 Arizona v. California, 439 U.S. 419 (1979)

    16/25

    ----------------- ---------------

    Annual

    Annual Consumptive

    Diversions Use Priority

    Defined Area of Land (acre-feet) (acre-feet) Date

    ----------------- ---------------

    Annual

    Annual Consumptive

    Diversions Use Priority

    Defined Area of Land (acre-feet) (acre-feet) Date

    ----------------- ---------------

    Annual

    Annual Consumptive

    Diversions Use Priority

    Defined Area of Land (acre-feet) (acre-feet) Date

    ----------------- ---------------

    Annual

    Annual Consumptive

    Diversions Use Priority

    Defined Area of Land (acre-feet) (acre-feet) Date

    ----------------- ---------------

    March 9, 1964, in this case, such rights having been decreed by Art. II:

    Annual

  • 8/17/2019 Arizona v. California, 439 U.S. 419 (1979)

    17/25

    Diversions Net Priority

    Defined Area of Land (acre-feet) Acres Date

    81)

    Fort Mojave Indian Reservation 12,5348 1,9398 Sept. 18, 1890

    82)

    Lake Mead National Recreation Area 500 3009 May 3, 192910

    (The Overton Area of Lake Mead

     N.R.A. provided in Executive

    Order 5105)

    It is ordered that Judge Elbert P. Tuttle be appointed Special Master in this case

    with authority to fix the time and conditions for the filing of additional

    A. Federal Establishments' Present Perfected Rights—Continued

     pleadings and to direct subsequent proceedings, and with authority to summon

    witnesses, issue subpoenas, and take such evidence as may be introduced and

    such as he may deem necessary to call for. The Master is directed to submit

    such reports as he may deem appropriate.

    The Master shall be allowed his actual expenses. The allowances to him, the

    compensation paid to his technical, stenographic, and clerical assistants, the

    cost of printing his report, and all other proper expenses shall be charged

    against and borne by the parties in such proportion as the Court may hereafter 

    direct.

    It is further ordered that if the position of Special Master in this case becomes

    vacant during a recess of the Court, THE CHIEF JUSTICE shall have authorityto make a new designation which shall have the same effect as if originally

    made by the Court.

  • 8/17/2019 Arizona v. California, 439 U.S. 419 (1979)

    18/25

    1 The quantity of water in each instance is measured by (i) diversions or (ii)

    consumptive use required for irrigation of the respective acreage and for the

    satisfaction of related uses, whichever of (i) or (ii) is less.

    2 The names in parentheses following the description of the "Defined Area of 

    Land" are used for identification of present perfected rights only; the name usedis the first name appearing as the Claimants identified with a parcel in

    Arizona's 1967 list submitted to this Court.

    3 Included as a part of the Powers' claim in Arizona's 1967 list submitted to this

    Court. Subsequently, the United States and Powers agreed to a Stipulation of 

    Settlement on land ownership whereby title to this property was quieted in

    favor of the United States.

    4 The names in parentheses following the description of the "Defined Area of 

    Land" are the names of claimants, added since the 1967 list, upon whose water 

    use these present perfected rights are predicated.

    5 The quantity of water in each instance is measured by (i) diversions or (ii)

    consumptive use required for irrigation of the respective acreage and for 

    satisfaction of related uses, whichever of (i) or (ii) is less.

    43)

    City of Needles

    6 1,500 950 1885

    44)

    Portions of: Secs. 5, 6, 7 & 8, T.7N.,

    R.24E.; Sec. 1, T.7N., R.23E.;Secs. 4,

    It is further ordered that the motion of Fort Mojave Indian Tribe et al. for leave

    to intervene, insofar as it seeks intervention to oppose entry of the supplemental

    decree, is denied. In all other respects, this motion and the motion of Colorado

    River Indian Tribes et al. for leave to intervene are referred to the Special

    Master.

    Mr. Justice MARSHALL took no part in the consideration or decision of thiscase.

  • 8/17/2019 Arizona v. California, 439 U.S. 419 (1979)

    19/25

    5, 9, 10, 15, 22, 23, 25, 26, 35, & 36,

    T.8N., R.23E.; Secs. 19, 29, 30, 32 &

    33, T.9N., R.23E., S.B.B. & M. (Atchison,

    Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Co.)

    6

     1,260 273 1896

    45)

    Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, & SW1/4 NW1/4 of 

    Sec. 5, T.13S., R.22E., S.B.B. & M.

    (Conger)

    7 1.0 0.6 1921

    46)

    Lots 1, 2, 3, 4 of Sec. 32, T.11S., R.22E.,

    S.B.B. & M. (G. Draper)7 1.0 0.6 1923

    47)

    Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, and SE1/4 SW1/4 of Sec.

    20, T.11s., R.22E., S.B.B. & M. (McDonough)7 1.0 0.6 1919

    48)

    SW1/4 of Sec. 25, T.8S., R.22E., S.B.B.

    & M. (Faubion)

    7 1.0 0.6 1925

    49)

    W1/2 NW1/4 of Sec. 12, T.9N., R.22E., S.B.B.

    & M. (Dudley)

    7 1.0 0.6 1922

  • 8/17/2019 Arizona v. California, 439 U.S. 419 (1979)

    20/25

    50)

     N1/2 SE1/4 and Lots 1 and 2 of Sec. 13,

    T.8S., R.22E., S.B.B. & M. (Douglas)7 1.0 0.6 1916

    51)

     N1/2 SW1/4, NW1/4 SE1/4, Lots 6 and 7,

    Sec. 5, T.9S., R22E., S.B.B. & M. (Beauchamp)7 1.0 0.6 1924

    52)

     NE1/4 SE1/4, SE1/4 NE1/4, and Lot 1, Sec. 26,

    T.8S., R.22E., S.B.B. & M. (Clark)7 1.0 0.6 1916

    53)

     N1/2 SW1/4, NW1/4 SE1/4, SW1/4 NE1/4, Sec. 13,

    T.9S., R.21E., S.B.B. & M. (Lawrence)7 1.0 0.6 1915

    54)

     N1/2 NE1/4, E1/2 NW1/4, Sec. 13, T.9S., R.21E.,

    S.B.B. & M. (J. Graham)7 1.0 0.6 1914

    55)

    SE1/4, Sec. 1, T.9S., R.21E., S.B.B. & M.

    (Geiger)

    7 1.0 0.6 1910

    56)

    Fractional W1/2 of SW1/4 (Lot 6)

    Sec. 6, T.9S., R.22E., S.B.B. &

    M. (Schneider)7 1.0 0.6 1917

  • 8/17/2019 Arizona v. California, 439 U.S. 419 (1979)

    21/25

    57)

    Lot 1, Sec. 15; Lots 1 & 2, Sec. 14;

    Lots 1 & 2, Sec. 23; all in T.13S.,

    R.22E., S.B.B. & M. (Martinez)

    7

     1.0 0.6 1895

    58)

     NE1/4, Sec. 22, T.9S., R.21E., S.B.B.

    & M. (Earle)

    7 1.0 0.6 1925

    59)

     NE1/4 SE1/4, Sec. 22, T.9S., R.21E.,

    S.B.B. & M. (Diehl)7 1.0 0.6 1928

    60)

     N1/2 NW1/4, N1/2 NE1/4, Sec. 23, T.9S.,

    R.21E., S.B.B. & M. (Reid)7 1.0 0.6 1912

    61)

    W1/2 SW1/4, Sec. 23, T.9S., R.21E.,

    S.B.B. & M. (Graham)

    7

     1.0 0.6 1916

    62)

    S1/2 NW1/4, NE1/4 SW1/4, SW1/4 NE1/4,

    Sec. 23, T.9S., R.21E., S.B.B. &

    M. (Cate)

    7 1.0 0.6 1919

    63)

  • 8/17/2019 Arizona v. California, 439 U.S. 419 (1979)

    22/25

    SE1/4 NE1/4, N1/2 SE1/4, SE1/4

    SE1/4, Sec. 23, T.9S., R.21E.,

    S.B.B. & M. (McGee)71.0 0.6 1924

    64)

    SW1/4 SE1/4, SE1/4 SW1/4, Sec. 23,

     NE1/4 NW1/4, NW1/4 NE1/4, Sec. 26;

    all in T.9S., R.21E., S.B.B. & M.

    (Stallard)

    7 1.0 0.6 1924

    65)

    W1/2 SE1/4, SE1/4 SE1/4, Sec. 26, T.9S.,

    R.21E., S.B.B. & M. (Randolph)7 1.0 0.6 1926

    66)

    E1/2 NE1/4, SW1/4 NE1/4, SE1/4 NW1/4, Sec.

    26, T.9S., R.21E., S.B.B. & M. (Stallard)7 1.0 0.6 1928

    67)

    S1/2 SW1/4, Sec. 13, N1/2 NW1/4, Sec. 24;

    all in T.9S., R.21E., S.B.B. & M. (Keefe)7 1.0 0.6 1926

    68)

    SE1/4 NW1/4, NW1/4 SE1/4, Lots 2, 3 & 4,

    Sec. 25, T.13S., R.23E., S.B.B. & M. (C. Ferguson)7 1.0 0.6 1903

    69)

    Lots 4 & 7, Sec. 6; Lots 1 & 2, Sec. 7;

  • 8/17/2019 Arizona v. California, 439 U.S. 419 (1979)

    23/25

    all in T.14S., R.24E., S.B.B. & M. (W. Ferguson)7 1.0 0.6 1903

    70)

    SW1/4 SE1/4, Lots 2, 3, and 4, Sec. 24,

    T.12S., R.21E., Lot 2, Sec. 19, T.12S.,

    R.22E., S.B.B. & M. (Vaulin)7 1.0 0.6 1920

    71)

    Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4, Sec. 25, T.12S.,

    R.21E., S.B.B. & M. (Salisbury)7 1.0 0.6 1920

    72)

    Lots 2, 3, SE1/4 SE1/4, Sec. 15, NE1/4

     NE1/4, Sec. 22; all in T.13S., R.22E.,

    S.B.B. & M. (Hadlock)71.0 0.6 1924

    73)

    SW1/4 NE1/4, SE1/4 NW1/4, and Lots 7 & 8,

    Sec. 6, T.9S., R.22E., S.B.B. & M. (Streeter)7 1.0 0.6 1903

    74)

    Lot 4, Sec. 5; Lots 1 & 2, Sec. 7;

    Lots 1 & 2, Sec. 8; Lot 1, Sec. 18;

    all in T.12S., R.22E., S.B.B. & M.

    (J. Draper)

    7 1.0 0.6 1903

    75)

    SW1/4 NW1/4, Sec. 5; SE1/4 NE1/4 and

  • 8/17/2019 Arizona v. California, 439 U.S. 419 (1979)

    24/25

    Lot 9, Sec. 6; all in T.9S., R.22E.,

    S.B.B. & M. (Fitz)

    71.0 0.6 1912

    76)

     NW1/4 NE1/4, Sec. 26; Lots 2 & 3, W1/2

    SE1/4, Sec. 23; all in T.8S., R.22E.,

    S.B.B. & M. (Williams)71.0 0.6 1909

    77)

    Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, & 5, Sec. 25, T.8S.,

    R.22E., S.B.B. & M. (Estrada)7 1.0 0.6 1928

    78)

    S1/2 NW1/4, Lot 1, frac. NE1/4 SW1/4 Sec.

    25, T.9S., R.21E., S.B.B. & M. (Whittle)71.0 0.6 1925

    79)

     N1/2 NW1/4, Sec. 25; S1/2 SW1/4, Sec.

    24; all in T.9S., R.21E., S.B.B. & M.

    (Corington)

    7 1.0 0.6 1928

    80)

    S1/2 NW1/4, N1/2 SW1/4, Sec. 24, T.9S.,

    R.21E., S.B.B. & M. (Tolliver)7 1.0 0.6 1928

    III

     NEVADA

  • 8/17/2019 Arizona v. California, 439 U.S. 419 (1979)

    25/25

    A. Federal Establishments' Present Perfected Rights

    The federal establishments named in Art. II, subdivision (D), paragraphs (5)

    and (6) of the Decree entered on

    ----------

    6 The names in parentheses following the description of the "Defined Area of 

    Land" are used for identification of present perfected rights only; the name used

    is the first name appearing as the claimant identified with a parcel in

    California's 1967 list submitted to this Court.

    7 The names in parenthesis following the description of the "Defined Area of 

    Land" are the names of the homesteaders upon whose water use these present

     perfected rights, added since the 1967 list submitted to this Court, are

     predicated.

    8 The quantity of water in each instance is measured by (i) diversions or (ii)

    consumptive use required for irrigation of the respective acreage and for 

    satisfaction of related uses, whichever of (i) or (ii) is less.

    9 Refers to acre-feet of annual consumptive use, not to net acres.

    Article II (D)(6) of said Decree specifies a priority date of March 3, 1929.Executive Order 5105 is dated May 3, 1929 (see. C.F.R.1964 Cumulative

    Pocket Supplement, p. 276, and the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law of 

    the Special Master's Report in this case, pp. 294-295).

    10